Search This Site

Friday, 1 July 2011

KCC: Minerals & Waste Sites Preferred Options - Consultation Reminder

From: []
Sent: 09 July 2012 12:20
Subject: Kent County Council: Minerals and Waste Sites Preferred Options - Consultation Reminder

Dear Consultee,

This email is to remind you that the following Kent Minerals and Waste Development Framework public consultations will close in two weeks on Monday 23 July 2012 at 5pm.

The Mineral Sites and the Waste Sites Plans consultation at this ‘preferred options’ stage is the second time we have asked for your views in the process of preparing these plans. The responses from the 2011 site plans consultations at ‘options’ stage have assisted us in the site assessment and selection process, and are saved as part of the evidence base. Both documents now identify the sites that are considered to be the best and most sustainable sites needed by Kent for minerals and waste management up to the end of 2030. There are now 25 preferred option sites for mineral supply and 21 preferred option sites for waste management. The remaining sites are identified as ‘not allocated’.

We would like your views on these preferred options. The responses received from this second round of consultations will help us with the preparation of the final plans. You are invited to give us your views on:
  1. what these documents should contain;
  2. the proposed preferred option sites for minerals extraction and supply and waste management;
  3. the sites not selected as preferred options;
  4. the evidence base that has been prepared to inform the plans (including the draft Local Aggregate Assessment, the Waste Needs Assessment update, the accompanying Interim Sustainability Appraisal, the Habitat Regulations Assessment, the Strategic Flood Risk Assessments and details explaining how the site assessment process was carried out).

To submit your views we recommend that you use our online consultation portal at to inspect the consultation documents and evidence base topic papers, and the accompanying Sustainability Assessment Commentary and Habitat Regulations Assessment Report.

If you prefer, you can email your comments to or write to us at: MWLP Project Team, Planning and Environment, Kent County Council, Invicta House, Maidstone, Kent ME14 1XX. All submitted comments will be published on our online consultation portal.

You can inspect copies of the two main consultation documents at the main Kent County Council offices[2], in Gateways, and in local libraries.

Please contact us at the addresses above or visit our website for further information.

Yours faithfully

[2] Sessions House, Maidstone; Joynes House, Gravesend; Kroner House, Ashford; Kings Hill Office, West Malling; St. Peter's House, Broadstairs.

Flyer & Poster - The Village Meeting - Wind Turbines - 26th July - 7.30pm - Sellindge School Hall

Click on the links below to see the flyer and poster with details of the Village Meeting on 26th July at 7.30pm in the Sellindge School Hall where Wind Turbines will be discussed and in particular the Planning Application for the 6 Wind Turbines at Harringe Brooks Y12/0451/SH. These will open in a new tab.  

Shepway Planning have agreed to attend and answer your questions. Damian Collins, MP., Ecotricity, all the Parish Councils, Protect Kent (CPRE) and Kent Downs AONB have also been invited to add to the debate.

To make the words larger (i.e. easier to read), click once on the letter.

flyer - The Village Meeting on 26th July

poster - The Village Meeting on 26th July

Stanford Parish Council - additional objection points to 6 wind turbine application

Click on the link below to see Stanford Parish Council's additional points of objection to the Planning Application for the 6 Wind Turbines at Harringe Brooks Y12/0451/SH. This will open in a new tab. 

To make the words larger (i.e. easier to read), click once on the letter.

Stanford Parish Council - additional points to objection to the Planning Application for 6 wind turbines at Harringe Brooks

Ad watchdog to examine wind farm protest leaflet

The article below was published on 1st August 2012 in the Folkestone Herald. To read the article more easily (enlarge the print) click on the image below. Once finished, click on the back-arrow at the top left of the screen to return to the website and then navigate your way around as usual. Use the 'Home' page link in Section 1 to return to the start if you prefer.

Message from Our Chairman - Why demonstrate

Dear Fellow Villager,

I am writing to you about wind power to accompany an article (see a copy by going to the coloured Section 2, in the right-hand column, and clicking on the item entitled '* New 02)  'Germany's wind power chaos is a warning to us' by Christopher Brooker in the Sunday Telegraph and published last weekend. I hope his article and my email  below will ensure that you come and join our demonstration at the Sellindge Sports & Social Club in Swan Lane at 1.30pm on Saturday 29th September (tomorrow).

When most of us first heard about wind power to generate electricity we welcomed it with enthusiasm. After all, wind comes free of charge. Free energy – what a wonderful idea! But slowly at first, we began to discover that nothing comes for free, least of all wind power. The so called ‘bribes’ to local authorities who are prepared to accept wind turbines have to be paid for. Who pays? We who pay our electricity bills pay. The rent that is paid to farmers or land owners –  according to Press Reports up to £40,000 per turbine per year – a small fortune - has to be paid. Who pays? We who pay our electricity bills pay. Then there is the huge cost of manufacture and installation together with maintenance. Who pays – we who pay our electricity bills pay. As Christopher Brooker points out in his article, Germany has 29,000 wind turbines and they have the most expensive electricity in Europe.

One of the reasons for the high cost of generating electricity from the ‘free’ wind power is that the wind doesn’t always blow. Two issues arise from this unreliability of wind power. The first is that wind power in the UK is only 25% efficient. Companies like Ecotricity claim a capacity to provide electricity for so many thousands of homes. That is if they could run at 100% efficiency. But they don’t. They run at an average of 25%, merely a quarter of what they claim. Then there is the amazing fact that to ensure that our supplies of electricity can be met, we must continue to build and run conventional or nuclear power stations. Since in this situation these back up power stations run inefficiently, any carbon saving made by wind power is added back by the conventional processes running when they are not needed..

Now I wonder if you, like me, expect to hear from anyone in authority – anyone – who will give some explanation as to why we who live in the countryside should suffer the imposition of such huge machine with their noise and movement and malign presence when the claims made for wind power are false. Yes, it might be true that 65% of the population welcome Wind Turbines but of those, how many live in countryside where wind turbines might be built  and indeed how many of the city dwellers have ever seen a wind turbine – not many.

In opposing the Ecotricity Planning Application  for six turbines in Sellindge we have to concentrate upon other reasons for stopping them. I just wanted to take this opportunity to mention some of the reasons that cannot be accepted in the Shepway planning debate, about giant wind turbines that should not be built here..

Please do come and join us  in our protest on Saturday.  Radio Kent will be broadcasting  a local interview on Saturday morning at about 7.10am and BBC television and the Press have asked for film and pictures. But most of all, Ecotricity and our Planners will be in no doubt that Sellindge and Lympne are not the right places for six 410ft high wind turbines.
I look forward to seeing you on Saturday,
Ronald Lello
Chairman Sellindge and District Residents Association 

Otterpool Waste Site - take it off the preferred sites list...

From: Susan Carey
To: Margaret Ludlow
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: Otterpool waste site.
Hallo Margaret I do not know if the process of obtaining a licence from the Environment Agency will permanently delay Countrystyle starting their operations. I do know that they have plenty of hurdles to overcome to do so and they must also meet all the planning conditions. As for the site being on the preferred options list, I'm afraid that's no more than a recognition that the site has planning permission (albeit with lots of conditions) for a waste operation. We lost that particular battle and must concentrate on making sure that the EA does its job. I agree that housing is preferable to a waste plant but we don't have the choice. Do by all means respond to the consultation on the waste and mineral sites but don't expect to be able to overturn what has already happened through the planning process. Kind regards, Susan

On 10 Jul 2012, at 11:20, "Margaret Ludlow" wrote: 
Dear Susan I had a enormous file from KCC (URS) about the development at Otterpool. I went through it all and I know that they were granted permission to build their awful site at Otterpool. can this be changed in any way or permanently delayed with the help of the Environment agency?. Just recently they Airport Cafe has taken on more staff and open longer hours to cope with increased custom ,and if this waste plant goes ahead they will loose that plus all the other reasons nearly 2000 people do not want it there. Has any of this been taken into account? In an area of outstanding beauty non of this was mentioned in the long report. Please if it can be taken of the preferred sites list it would be wonderful. As Sellindge is down for more houses in the Shepway Core plan it would seem to me to be the lesser of two evils to have a small development in the Quarry and leave the green sites alone in Sellindge. Yours Sincerely Margaret Ludlow.

Lympne Parish Council response to the six Wind Turbine Planning Application Harringe Brooks

Click on the link below to see a copy of the letter sent by Lympne Parish Council to Shepway District Council with comments on Planning Application No. Y12/0451/SH (Six Wind Turbines at Harringe Brook). This will open in a new tab. 

Lympne Parish Council response to Shewpay District Council re the 6 Wind Turbines Planning Application 

Government plans to break its own climate change law

The article below was published on 29th July 2012 in The Sunday telgraph. To read the article more easily (enlarge the print) click on the image below. Once finished, click on the back-arrow at the top left of the screen to return to the website and then navigate your way around as usual. Use the 'Home' page link in Section 1 to return to the start.  

Folkestone racecourse to close at end of season

Click on the link below, which opens in a new tab, to read an article in the KM News about Folkestone racecourse to close at the end of the season.

Axe held over 60 jobs as racecourse to close

The articles below were published on or around the 1st August 2012 in the local papers. To read each article more easily (enlarge the print) click on its image. Once you have read that one, click on the back-arrow in the top left of the screen of that image to return to here. Then select the next image to read and so on. 

Once finished reading as many as you wish, click on the back-arrow at the top left of the screen to return to here and then navigate your way around as usual. Use the 'Home' page link in Section 1 to return to the start. 

wind turbines - interesting cases.....

From: martyn
 Sent: 26 July 2012 09:34
Subject: Wind turbines
Good Morning Mr Motley,
I am moving to Stone Street, Lympne tomorrow to our new home, I have done a fair bit of research on the turbine proposal and given the quantity of objections and proximity to the sea (a much more suited place for turbines) I am hopeful the local authority will refuse the application.
I have however just read about a couple of interesting cases and thought I would drop you a line with the links in case you had not seen them (they came via a solicitors newsletter I get).
I particularly like the quotes used in the second article.
Best of luck with the meeting tonight, we would have loved to attend but as we move tomorrow morning will be up to our ears in boxes!
I hope the above is of some use.
Kind regards

Racecourse to close as housing plan is delayed

The article below was published on 23rd September 2012 in the Sunday Telegraph. To read the article more easily (enlarge the print) click on the image below. Once finished, click on the back-arrow at the top left of the screen to return to the website and then navigate your way around as usual. Use the 'Home' page link in Section 1 to return to the start if you prefer.

UK-wide conservation group - campaigned against turbines for 20 years

From: Margaret Ludlow []
Sent: 20 July 2012 12:27
Subject: windfarm web site.

Interesting - Click on this link, which will open in a new tab -

Questions to ask re Wind farms - useful website

From: Margaret Ludlow []
Sent: 19 July 2012 11:51
Subject: Questions to ask re Wind farms - useful website

Questions and answers about  Wind Farms
Click on this link, which will open up in a new tab  and show key Questions to ask re Wind farms. Clearly, the wind farm is a different wind farm but the questions are the same.

Wind farm in Polegate unanimously opposed by town council

From: Margaret Ludlow []
Sent: 19 July 2012 10:02
Subject: Polegate wind farm.

Last night on southern news was an item that the developers had withdrawn the application for 5 turbines close to houses. On the web are lots of articles for and against the application.

Here is one - THE WIND farm in Polegate has been unanimously opposed by the town council 

Councillor Shirley Newlands - called it forward to Committee

From: Shirley Griffiths Solicitors []
Sent: 18 July 2012 16:17
To: Dave Motley
Subject: Fw: the issued flyer

Good afternoon

I will be attending the meeting at Sellindge School Hall on 26 July.

I am speaking at the Planning meeting for Lympne against the project.  
All but one are in Lympne and Court-at-Street.

I have called it forward to Committee.

Kind regards

Councillor Shirley Newlands

Axe held over 60 jobs as racecourse to close

The article below was published around the 4th August 2012 in the KM. To read the article more easily (enlarge the print) click on the image below. Once finished, click on the back-arrow at the top left of the screen to return to the website and then navigate your way around as usual. Use the 'Home' page link in Section 1 to return to the start if you prefer. 

Planning Application Y12/0451/SH Proposed Wind Farm

5th July 2012 

Planning Policy Team
Shepway District Council
Civic Centre
Castle Hill Avenue
Kent  CT20 2QY
Dear Sir or Madam,

Planning Application Y12/0451/SH Proposed Wind Farm

 We are very disturbed to hear that the planning application for the Proposed Wind Farm at Otterpool Lane, is now being considered.   Once again KCC/Shepway Council are determined to destroy an area of outstanding natural beauty.

The Countryside Act 1968 states:
‘In the exercise of their functions relating to land under any enactment every minister, government department and  public body shall have regard to the desirability of conserving the natural beauty and amenity of the countryside’.

Of major concern to everyone should be the lobbying by wind farm developers of Government. because the planning regulations protect the interests of us all, developers are seeking a fast-track route through the planning laws in the interests of economics and themselves, but certainly not to concerned individuals and groups.

A great deal of research has shown that onshore wind turbines are a politically driven ‘quick-fix’ which has not been fully reasoned through.
They are:

• Ineffective as to overall emission savings.
• Unreliable, inefficient and unpredictable as to power generation, requiring costly and inefficient standby power plants
• Uneconomic without subsidy.
• Damaging to the greater environment, to tourism, and to the health and safety of local residents. 
• Devaluation of nearby property – would you want to live next to 125m high turbines?

With the collapse of major power companies like Enron and British Energy, bonds must be taken by Councils to cover the costs of decommissioning wind turbines. Scottish Power, for instance, have debts of £6 billion, equivalent to their total turnover. What guarantee do we have that they will be around in 25 years time to decommission any turbines installed?

By concentrating on windpower, research and engineering effort is being diverted from other, less environmentally damaging and more reliable renewable energy sources. For the power companies windpower is a quick, proven and relatively simple route to government subsidies – in other words they are in it for the money!


The British Wind Energy Association states ‘Wind turbines are not noisy *(i)
‘More and more people are describing their lives as unbearable when they are directly exposed to the acoustical and optical effects of windfarms. There are reports of people being signed off sick and unfit for work, there is a growing number of complaints about symptoms such as pulse irregularities and states of anxiety, which are known from the effects of infrasound (sound of frequencies below the normal audible limit *(ii))’

Because of the low rotational rates of the turbine blades, the peak acoustic energy radiated by large wind turbines is in the infrasonic range with a peak in the 8-12Hz range.. [and] it would appear that wind energy does carry health risks.  Typically, except very near the source, people out of doors cannot detect the presence of low-frequency noise from a wind turbine. They can, however, if the noise has an impulsive characteristic, ‘hear’ it within homes in nearby communities, again under the right set of circumstances. Because of the impulsive nature of the acoustic low-frequency energy being emitted, there is an interaction between the incident acoustic impulses and the resonance of the homes which serve to amplify the stimulus, creating vibrations as well as redistributing the energy higher into the audible frequency region. Thus the annoyance is often connected with the periodic nature of the emitted sounds rather than the frequency of the acoustic energy’.*(iii)

Standing 1000 metres downwind of the turbines is enough for most people to realise that they would not like to live within this distance of a turbine. The sound is invasive enough to penetrate the walls and double glazing of a house of modern construction and still be clearly audible inside’..

For people living close to a windfarm life can quite literally be hell. Noise, flicker and visual domination are all a constant source of concern and anxiety’.


:As with any large rotating structure – and some turbines are 400 feet tall – there is a risk to passers-by from structural failure e.g. lightning strike and storm damage. In winter ice shards forming on the blades when static can be thrown up to a quarter of a mile when the blades begin rotation. This will produce formidable safety concerns for windfarms close to footpaths & bridleways


 A National Tourist Survey showed that 90% of British holidaymakers who go to the countryside do so to enjoy it for its own sake. Evidence from Europe shows that visitor numbers have dropped by up to 40% where windfarms proliferate. – that would mean a loss of several million a year and countless jobs. Economic disaster for a highly rural area, as farming, fishing & forestry are all struggling to survive. Directly or indirectly we all depend on tourism, and there is no viable alternative. Tourist areas market the country on the people, the history, and the landscape – justifiably so. If we destroy that landscape with windfarms so that tourists go elsewhere to unspoilt areas, where will that leave our economy, and especially the rural areas? Even a 10% drop in tourism would be economic disaster

In Scotland in April 2002 they surveyed the last 100 bookings from self-catering cottages, and 76% of past guests said they would definitely/probably not visit the area if a windfarm was built. If windfarms proliferated in Scotland, 68% said they would definitely/ probably not visit again – a frighteningly high proportion.

The Welsh and Cumbrian Tourist Boards are already backing objections to windfarms, and the Welsh Tourist Board has revised its policy on wind farms and specifically endorsed the following.
The Board opposes the introduction of commercial wind turbines and wind turbine power stations in both the primary designated areas (National Parks, Heritage Coast, National Marine Nature Reserves and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) and on natural sites that are clearly visible from the primary designated areas. They consider that elsewhere proposals should demonstrate that there will be no detrimental effect on tourism.


The visual, aural and physical damage windfarms impose on the landscape is all too apparent. Given the number and height of turbines the risk of bird-strike is considerable, especially in poor visibility. There is no denying that wind turbines are inextricably linked to bird and bat mortality. The RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) receives regular funding from the power company Scottish & Southern. How then can we be assured of their impartiality when assessing Environmental Impact Reports?

In conclusion, how can Shepway Planning Department even consider the planning application of these wind turbines when they are so near to residential properties in Sellinge, Lympne and surrounding areas.  We do not want these windfarms. They are detremental to the environment, health, tourism and Wildlife and will strongly affect our quality of life.

Yours faithfully

Denise Jorgensen
David Lambourne

Copied to Damian Collins MP
Rt Hon Michael Howard
Ronald Lello, Chairman Sellinge and District Residents Association

Most of this information can be found in a detailed document.  If you would like the full report please let us know.
 (i) ( frequently asked questions).
(ii) The Darmstadt Manifesto: A Paper on Wind Energy by the German Professors Initiative Group
(iii) Neil Kelley, US National Renewable Energy Laboratory].


The articles contained in this website are for general informational purposes only and have been provided by various sources including the public, newspaper content and local bodies. These articles are then presented by Sellindge & District Residents Association on this website, and while we endeavour to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. Any reliance you place on such information is therefore strictly at your own risk. In no event will we be liable for any loss or damage including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage whatsoever arising from loss of data or profits arising out of, or in connection with, the use of this website.

Through this website you are able to link to other websites which are not under the control of Sellindge & District Residents Association. We have no control over the nature, content and availability of those sites. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.

Every effort is made to keep the website up and running smoothly. However, Sellindge & District Residents Association takes no responsibility for, and will not be liable for, the website being temporarily unavailable due to technical issues beyond our control. This website may include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. The Sellindge & District Residents Association has no business relationship with any organisations mentioned in this website.